Looking back on Obama’s first year in office, I think it is pretty clear that his biggest defeat has not been related to policy. His biggest disappointment has been his failure to change the tone in Washington. As Mark Whitaker points out, Obama is by nature a bridge-builder. He isn’t afraid of the other side and sees value-in-itself to working with them. He assembled a Team of Rivals and former opponents in his cabinet. Early on, he reached out by inviting Republicans to attend public workshops at the White House. The response was an embrace of Birtherism and Teabagging, combined with rigidly disciplined obstruction on a totally unprecedented scale. This was an easy way for the Republicans to deal Obama a symbolic defeat that has very concrete consequences. The way Obama is forced to govern as a result of this Republican strategy is almost a breach of one of his core hope-messages. And in a more tangible sense, it has forced him to trim his ambitions to suit the most conservative members of his caucus who, my mere happenstance, each enjoy an effective veto over policy. This truth must supplement Whitaker’s observation on health care:
On health care, Obama’s studious decision to avoid the mistakes of “Hillarycare” and delegate the bill-writing to Congress may yet be vindicated if a reform act passes next year. But he underestimated how giving legislators the keys to the car would drag out the process and allow grandiose senators to hijack the vehicle and demand to be paid off with side deals and media attention.
Had he known in advance that the Republicans would intimidate all of their members into not only opposing any health care reform, but in supporting unprecedented levels of obstruction, he may have taken a different path. This was a failure on Obama’s part that probably reflects a certain lack of imagination. He wasn’t cynical enough. Yet, as Whitaker notes, Obama tends to be a quick learner.
Yet, if this first year has sometimes made President Obama seem caught off-guard and frustrated by the meanness and mayhem of Washington, no one should assume that he won’t learn from the experience.
The other theme running through “Dreams From My Father” is Obama’s capacity for self-examination and self-improvement. He has applied that introspection to becoming a better person, a better writer and speaker, and a better politician. In Hawaii for the holidays, taking the long walks he so misses at the White House, Obama may well be reflecting on what he needs to do to be a more effective president.
Exercising power, he may now see, involves more than giving impressive speeches and seeking common ground. As Ronald Reagan showed, it requires a sense for majesty and mystery. As LBJ demonstrated, it demands a behind-the-scenes talent for flattery and intimidation. As JFK proved, it helps to have an ironic, rather than a self-righteous, view of human motives and vanity. And as that other product of a messy childhood, Bill Clinton, could tell you: It’s not about bringing order to the world around you. It’s about learning to love the madness of governing before you can master it.
Obama will need to become tougher. His challenge will be to do so without losing that bridge-building quality that was so integral to his message of hope.
Had he known in advance that the Republicans would intimidate all of their members into not only opposing any health care reform, but in supporting unprecedented levels of obstruction, he may have taken a different path.
We knew that at the stimulus vote, if not before. Hell, he should have known this a year ago when the Republicans basically were calling him the Manchurian Candidate. Were you politically aware at all in the 90’s, Boo? Have you not read Digby or The Daily Howler(Yes, I read it .. despite considering Somersby to be insufferable)? The Republicans will always do everything in their power(with help from twits like Ben Nelson) so torpedo the Democratic agenda, no matter how popular it might be. I love the piece you quote even uses LBJ. Intimidation? We all know that’s not going to happen. When it comes down to it, it’s why certain people(cough … Hamsher … cough) want Obama to be more like LBJ and Vito Corleone all wrapped into one. Because his agenda isn’t going to get anywhere otherwise.
I don’t think “bridge-building” was “integral to his message of hope.” His bipartisanship was emphasized by the Villagers. He certainly spoke often enough about reaching out to the other side. But, the integral, i.e., essential component of the hope he offered was CHANGE. I didn’t really expect him to be progressive but I damn sure expected him to be liberal! So yeah, I’m disappointed to see him playing to the center on too many issues. Fuck the bridge-building.
you are correct. It was not emphasized except with the villagers.
And they used it to club him over the head all the time for not ‘doing enough’. they never brought up the fact that it takes both sides. Only that it is his fault somehow.
And that is how it’s been for over a year, before he was sworn in. Somehow, it was always Obama’s fault. Name whatever it is and it will be made to fit that theme. By the villagers, by the right. by the left (with Jane’s conspiracies leading the way).
True, but “bridge building” was/is integral to who he is. He likes a consensus. You may be disappointed to see him ‘play’ to the center, but unfortunately he is, and always will be, a centrist.
nalbar
You are talking about what resonated with you, but his message of change was only half of his appeal. His message of Hope was the other half. His promise to move beyond the petty partisan bickering did work on both fronts, but especially the latter. As someone who knocked doors for Obama, I can tell you that his Hope message was the stronger one for independents.
No, I’m not talking about just the way I saw it. You’re saying that the central essential element of Obama’s appeal was the promise to end partisan bickering. That was only a side benefit to most people, not the core of The Hope.
He won the primaries and the general because people hoped he would CHANGE the direction the country was going. For eight long years, the average citizen felt the quality of their lives sliding downhill. Wages were stagnant, job security was non-existant, costs were rising. Our nation which was once idolized by the rest of the world had become hated. Bush, the Rethugs and the Banksters had brought the global economy to the friggin’ brink of collapse.
It had all gotten so bad that — despite media influence — independents decided to give Democrats a chance to undo the damage, reverse the course, to please stop their lives from getting worse!
Obama didn’t get a mandate to pacify bickering in DC. He got elected to CHANGE the policies that were destroying our lives! Voters even gave him Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate to help him make the CHANGES he promised. What did he promise most often? An end to partisan bickering? Seriously, No. The big themes, the major facets of his Hope-product were affordable health care, improved public education and affordable college tuition, new national/green industries that would require new, better paying jobs and an end to our military involvment in Iraq and Afghanistan.
When you were knocking on those doors did you really get the impression that the main reason independents liked Obama was because he wasn’t going to hurt Republican’s feelings? Give me a break. They voted for him because they expected him to make their lives better! That was the HOPE and it was based on CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN! That was his campaign slogan, for goodness sake, so let’s not pretend it was only some vibe I picked up on my own.
God knows I disagree with BooMan but he’s right here. The impression I got was that Obama was liked because you really believed that he could cut through all the “traitor” “french” bullshit and say to the other side “let’s just work together to do what’s best for the country.” Yes people wanted him to make their lives better, but that wasn’t a function of POLICY so much as a function of holding out hope that we could stop fighting so much all the time and just try to figure things out.
I knew from the beginning that he counted me (as involved in the blogosphere) as part of the problem. People saw republicans as a very real enemy that was destroying the country and thought they should be defeated. That’s why he stopped posting at DKos after a handful of diaries. That’s one of several reasons he built parallel structures to the tools blog-activists had already set up.
Like I’ve said, I could live with that if I thought he really did have progressive/liberal priorities but I’ve seen no evidence he really believes in anything.
yeah, I would say that his post-partisan messaging was the single most effective part of his message for attracting center or right-leaning independents. It was critical for wins in Virginia, Indiana, and North Carolina. In the primaries, especially, this was true even of Democrats. A lot of them assumed a Hillary presidency would be a repeat of the craziness of her husband’s terms. What they didn’t know was that the GOP was going to be just as crazy about Obama as they were with Bill. With less moderation.
This is one you should post on Daily Kos. It has become so toxic lately and it is very sad.
While the rightwing is doing everything to destroy Obama and the fact that the republicans chose not to work with him, has been a failure but, it also takes two to tango.
There is also the same kind of thing going on on the left. A group who feel that Obama is not Harry Potter and that change was not done overnight so, he needs to be primaried.
If Obama was dealing with the rightwing’s hate, now he is faced with both sides and frankly, alot of it is silly.
Presidents do not make laws and presidents do not do alot of what the left is dinging Obama for.
That is why I feel I should defend him, even when I am not in agreement with an issue or policy stuff. Because so many are blaming him unfairly for things he has no control of.
I know if this toxic environment and the poison from the progressives and the right were not actively going on and the press getting into the act, over doing serious reporting and educating the public with facts, this president would be thought of having a really great first year.
It seem so many are ignorant of basic civics, of history, of what governing is and what is only magical thinking.
People left common sense by the wayside and took up alternative thinking, magical thinking and are so ill informed of the basics of what is governing and about politics in general.
We need a media that educates with facts and not spends its time dabbling in tabloid and gossip.
We need the people to stop believing in the impossible and conspiracies.
We need people to see what is real and what is possible.
I don’t know where we begin and how to stop it. But, it must.
Really great post, renior. I agree with every word.
nalbar
wow. thanks
It seem so many are ignorant of basic civics, of history, of what governing is and what is only magical thinking.
People left common sense by the wayside and took up alternative thinking, magical thinking and are so ill informed of the basics of what is governing and about politics in general.
It’s been a long time–30 years at least–since Americans actually faced facts and acted on them, so not surprisingly they’re a little rusty at that sort of thing.
Obama’s mission–whether he fully realizes it or not–is to gently coax Americans into the shallow paddling-pool of political decision-making on the national level. Naturally, the opposition is hell-bent to stop this because a display of effective decision-making in Washington would undercut their major thesis that Big Government Doesn’t Work. The intra-Beltway media Villagers can’t be too enthusiastic about Obama’s efforts either since they’ve also developed a huge vested interest in an ineffective Federal government–dysfunctionality makes good copy. Simply put, a sizable portion of the political nation doesn’t want government to function. No wonder Obama has his work cut out for him.
this is true. However, the fact that Obama is not given any time to gently coax anyone is a major problem. When he is seen largely as a failure and is getting hit from all sides after just 6 months in office, you have to wonder how he is going to accomplish anything.
The stubborn refusal to fact facts, to use common sense and to realize that things are not like a movie or television drama, where problems are solved in a few hours, is amazing.
It’s amazing how little people know and understand how their own government works, how legislation is done and that deals do get made all the time since the beginning of the republic.
And it is amazing that people really have no clue how long it takes to change 30 years of conservative rule and thinking in the country and a population is basically suspicious of democrats to begin with in this era.
So, he has to contend with his own side, the progressives, thinking they will have a far left nirvana right away. And that all their hearts desire will be passed overnight and that the president somehow makes that legislation and passes it all by himself.
On top of it all, there is a wicked double standard being used on him that is simply impossible to overcome and so, we are seeing a man who from the start, has had all these forces combining to take him down. To declare him a failure before he has time to do anything.
It is just stunning to me.
I love this guy. Like me, with better writing.
nalbar
Okay Booman. I’m confused by this post. What exactly would you do as president? “Didnt change the tone of Washington”. The brother only gets one year? Just one year to change 30 years of republican rule? He can’t have 2, maybe 3 years? Certainly he can’t have his full term. As far as not knowing about the obstruction, do you honestly think that he didnt know that white folks would trip? I mean really. The man who has gotten death threats and secret service protection didn’t know that some of his colleagues would act crazy for their base? As far as healthcare is concerned, you have a bill, that congress and the senate voted on, which is WAY more than Clinton got. Now it goes to conference. Where he said he’d get involved. Are you mad at Obama for getting a bill? Are you mad at him for not unleashing all of hysteria in getting this bill? Clinton stood in front of a joint session of congress and said that he would” take his veto pen and veto this bill” if they took out anything. How did that work out? You want a less obstructionist congress? Go to all fifty states, go door to door , explain why you policies are better, and identify progressive candidates. But no. You won’t do that. So you’ll just complain that Obama didn’t magically change Washington, didn’t get you the perfect healthcare bill the perfect way you wanted it. Oh well. Explain it to me Booman. And I don’t care if commenters rip on me. You can all kiss my butt!
seriously. The double standard where this president is concerned is disgusting.
Other presidents get a full term to prove themselves. this president was judged and dismissed 6 months ago.
how is that fair?
Why?
And it is not just rightwingers.
If any other president managed to do something so historical as to get Health Care passed, something that presidents for 70 years have tried and failed to do, there would be corks popping and congrats all around.
But, Obama does the near impossible and we get glum and what a disappointment he is.
We get a decided thud.
I’m not mad at him. I think he failed to change the tone, and he’s paying a price for that and also for making concessions that brought no pay-off. Hopefully he now knows better.
Booman isnt mad enough.
the president has a mandate for a public option….pols say 65% of americans want it. nobody else had that. not clinton for sure. this isnt 1965 when only 35% of americans were against lynching.
obama is not a bridge builder at all. show me the bridge he built. he is a kindergarten teacher telling the kids in the sandbox to play nice. and completely ineffective at even that.
no he doesnt get 2 years or 3 years to do healthcare right. when you let the corporate lobbyists in the front door and give them the prices they want on drugs and everything they want on healthcare even though you have the majority of the people behind you. and you do NOTHING to get what the people want. you dont get shit.
and when you do to the gay community what you did to appease the churchy african american community you dont get shit either.
yeah we get it….the AAs wont come out and vote if they arent extremely highly motivated. the gays will. and they have no place else to go. check the numbers if you dont believe me.
im sick of the obama apologists. you all need to go to CODA meetings. you are all like alcoholic enablers.
one more thing….obama aint tough.
he is a pussy as far as i can see.
and yes the senate sucks….esp leiberman. oh yeah leiberman was supported by who???????????? OBAMA!!!!
climate…..pussy.
equality rights….pussy
healthcare….pussy
fisa….pussy
guantanamo….pussy
if any of this changes in 3 years i will be the first to take my spanking.
How insulting… “churchy African-american community”.
Also comparing lynching to the healthcare debate is so low and disingenuous, I don’t know where to begin with that idiocy.
And what point are you trying to convey? And apparently, you have no idea of what you are talking about because have no concept of history, or how the legislative process works.
What an absolutely disgusting comment.
the churchy african american community is a big issue for me. they are my enemy, pure and simple. as bad as tea baggers. only not as stupid. which makes them more dangerous.
and i was comparing numbers in support of progressive legislation. we managed to get anti lynching laws removed. we managed to get civil rights legislation thru. we didnt have numbers then. we had hard working bull headed leaders who didnt sit on their asses and whine about congress wont play ball wah wah wah. now we have the numbers for progressive legislation and we have no leader in the white house.
Your take on how Civil Rights was enacted is complete revisionist history. You think that Civil Rights was passed in one swoop? There were several Civil Rights acts, each adding on to the previous one.
And there were several Presidents during that era who didn’t force congress to pass these acts. Congress crafted the bill and the President signed it. You would think FDR was a weakling, because Social Security was so watered down that no one really benefited from it.
Also quite a bit of civil rights legislation was enacted through the courts.
Kiss my natural black ass TWO times Anna in Philly!! Who just legalized marriage in Washington DC? A BLACK mayor and a BLACK city council for which they will get nothing for their efforts from the white racist gay community. Who just passed the Matthew Shepard hate crimes bill? it wasn’t your boy Bush. It was the BLACK man in the white house. Get over yourself! Gays are just one constituency. If you spent less time blaming black folks for your problems and more time with a grass-roots campaign you might be able to get married in your town. You don’t know me and you certainly don’t know how to get the issues you want. You better leave black folks alone before we go all civil rights movement on your ass!! Don’t hate blacks because they had a movement something you’ve had yet to do. So piss off Anna in Philly!!!!
Good comment. What struck me during the terror time was that there weren’t white Christians in Gitmo.
Why is Obama supposed to fix what has been broken for so long?
We have narsissitic people in Washington and elsewhere. They don’t change.
It is the people who vote who have more power to change the tone.
It would take years, but if the extreme nastiness is made to be socially acceptable, that would help.
first of all im not gay(so i can get married wherever i want) and what makes you think im not black? because i criticise obama? because im sick of him checkin in with the churchy AAs….yeah thats what i call them. i have sat in a room full of people of god and color and listened to them spout nothing but hate for gays. i know exactly how motivated they were on election day….people who never voted before….i was so happy i could have pissed myself…but then i saw the reality of the voter counting. and i saw it with my own eyes, the pressure from the black clergy not to do anything to move equal rights for gays forward. DC notwithstanding. yippeee. was there any reason for obama to submit legal briefs against equal rights? how are you all gonna ignore that one? actually 2? rahm’s job is to count votes on every single issue. and the progressives who are insisting on real change, you remember CHANGE dont ya? we dont have enough votes evidently. and where are we going to go? please. we dont go anywhere. look around at the blogs. they know we aint going anywhere.
now are you going to tell me how you excuse obama for letting the corporate lobbyists into the front door of the white house to help write the laws? he became exactly what he said he would not be. and worse.
and your apologist excuse is he had to do that to get what he could with healthcare? well then he is zero for zero!
its his laziness that is really pissing me off. (ooooo lazy black guy stereotype) too bad so many white assed progressives are afraid to say it. so afraid the “black folks will go civil rights movement on our asses”. i’m not afraid. i paid my dues in every social justice movement since 1965 when i was a kid at my first protest with my parents. i grew up in the hood, raised my kids in the hood, and worked in the hood. show me a more dangerous neighborhood than north camden nj where i CHOSE to live.
ps – bush was not my boy.
pss- Nutter IS my boy. best mayor philly ever had. and i worked for the first black mayor of philly. he was lazy AND dumb. i also worked for the first black mayor of camden nj. smart, definitely not lazy, corrupt as hell.
im sorry if i offend thee by calling it like i see it. you are wrong if you think its racism.
As I have stated earlier, your ignorance is astounding.
I don’t care what race you are. Now you have claimed that based on your experience sitting in a church of color, that all African-Americans, who attend church just spout off homophobic slurs? You think you can generalize all black churches that way and be taken seriously? And of course, Obama listens to them right?
As for your lobbyist comment, you apparently don’t keep up with current events or you would know that is not the case. And you could have worked with Harriet Tubman on the Underground Railroad and it wouldn’t change the fact that your whole entire comment is filled with stereotypes and generalizations.
As for Gitmo, yet again you apparently don’t keep up with current events. The DOJ has thousands of cases that are worked on daily, and since Obama is President, he can’t personally look at every case, especially since he’s not in the DOJ. But as Barney Frank stated a couple of months ago, DADT will be tackled next year in Congress as intended. We don’t know know what the outcome of the health care bill is yet, because there’s no final bill, there’s still conference.
The last time I checked, a president has a 4 year term, so we don’t how or what will be accomplished. But with supporters like you, who needs enemies. It would take a long post to effectually break the complete fallacies in your argument.
Criticism of a President is supposed to be constructive not destructive.
Anna, I’ve decide that you are too for ignorant for words. The black church is not your enemy. They are not impeding abortion rights or gay rights. That would be the catholic church. Anyway, if you knew anything, you’d be dangerous so I’m not worried. Happy Kwanzaa.
Sorry but you deserve a warning for your overuse of the word pussy and your use of the word apologist.
.
Booman, I respect your views and have learned a lot from you over the last year. But I have a question. How do you reconcile your defense of the administration’s actions during the HCR discussions and their back room deal with Pharam. They also sent out confusing messages defending PO one day and going against it the next. It was hard to know exactly where the President stood. Also don’t you hold them somewhat responsible for creating a division within the party by attacking the “left” as though they were not one of us? All we are trying to do is hold him accountable like he asked us to.
I suggest you read a little history if you think deals are not part of legislating.
Also, if Reid does deal, which is how it has always been, how is it the president’s fault.
You need to learn something about the history of congress and what goes into passing major legislation.
my question was directed @ booman. If you want to respond you can do so without being condescending. I guess to you everyone questioning this deal isn’t well read.
The deal with PhRMA was done to prevent them from going medieval on the effort to pass the bill. It worked, but just barely. Could they have passed anything with PhRMA blasting members and filling their challengers’ coffers? Doubtful.
Obama probably should not have promised to hold negotiations in the open on CSPAN. That was a promise he had no intention of keeping, for good reason.
I put it in the category of a broken promise that I don’t care about. I worked to elect him to pass the best legislation he could. I think he could have done better, but not a whole lot better. We’ll see what comes out of Conference. The Senate bill, as it stands, would be a major disappointment, but still worth passing. I’d like to be less disappointed.
I agree that the Senate bill is disappointing but worth passing. The main reason people are going after Obama is because they feel he didn’t fight hard enough for PO. Peggy Noonan’s article this morning confirms that the White House is very much aware that a lot of people on the left are angry at how the HCR was handled.
Not so much handled as what it ended up being. This looks to me like a suicide pact for Democrats.
You notice how much most Americans hate the health care industry? Now imagine how Americans will feel when they’re forced by Democrats to buy that same health insurance. Suddenly what was widespread anger at an industry will be directed at the political party that has forced them to stay in the ever-spiraling mess.
That. My parents are in that bubble, 50-60K with a great state health insurance plan courtesy of their union. They are going to get socked and they are going to stay home.
They’ve been hardcore voting democrats since 1976, strait ticket, down the line, now? Gone. They’re not voting for republicans but it killed any support for Democrats they had.
There are those people.
Then there are all the young people who aren’t covered but will be forced to buy health insurance. Now I know it’s important for everyone to be covered in order to form the largest risk pool. That doesn’t mean if you start lopping off an extra 2, 4 or 6 thousand bucks a year out of anyone’s living expenses that they’ll be grateful and thankful to the political party that does it to them. And the first time a private health insurance plan screws with someone or denies them something, guess who gets blamed for it? The Democrats.
Not to mention that this revives anti-abortionists in D.C.
The art of strategically surrendering everything but the title healthcare reform isn’t going to make the Democrats the party of forever. If anything it’s guaranteed a lot of people staying home next year.
I have a hard time casting Obama as naive (is that the opposite of cynical?) after reading about his history both as an African American man and as someone who came up through the ranks of Chicago politics.
And I think this idea of him becoming “tougher” is something progressives have been screaming about since the primaries. Seems to me that we fundamentally misunderstand him and what this “bridge-building” thing is all about.
I’m not sure that I can articulate it well either. But I saw it captured in speeches like the one he gave on race, on the Middle East in Cairo, and on abortion at Notre Dame. I think he recognizes that people are polarized in our constructs beyond what most of us actually believe and that the polarization keeps us from finding actual solutions to actual problems. We wind up defending our position rather looking for something that might actually work.
I don’t necessarily think I have much common ground with teabaggers any more than I do with Senator DeMint. But I wonder if I can’t find common ground with a Repubican who’s willing to admit that teachers need to be paid more AND held accountable for their performance. Is it possible to have that conversation in this country today? Not very likely. I assume that Obama knows it will take a long time for us to get there, but that’s his ultimate goal.
I think he spoke pretty clearly to all of this in a diary he wrote at Daily Kos back in September 2005.
And they think he was bashing Daily kos in that diary. I don’t understand where they got that from.
Because the goal of DKos is to make the Republican party obsolete as the only way to improve the country. Engagement is and has been shown to be a fool’s errand and the time it takes to change that, if it’s even possible (I figured I’d take a chance on that last November but it didn’t work) will take to long and our civilization will head into the bad days of Argentina with Climate Change topped off in it.
The constitution was one big compromise, so I don’t understand the surprise at the deal-making re: health care. We just hadn’t all been watching so closely before, or we took it for granted.
As for the original post, it’s true that “changing the tone” was something Obama talked about in the campaign and we all looked forward to it, hoping that there wouldn’t be a repeat of the Clinton era vitriol. But that was not to happen, even given Obama’s open hand.
So what next? How to move it more to a working-together atmosphere? One: keep doing what he is doing; kill them with kindness. The nicer he is the more absurd the Right looks. Every time McConnell says: “We weren’t included” I just laugh. No one but die-hards can truly believe it (though there always will be those die-hards). Have folks forgotten Grassley? The image that the right is trying to project about Obama just doesn’t fit what everyone can see with their own eyes. Two: Have an issue that forces the right to come along. This is JOBS. Obama can frame the jobs solution in such a way that the right is cornered into either supporting it and working with democrats, or totally rejecting it and further alienating themselves from the American public, looking for and more ridiculous.
There are other systemic factors here that might make a difference in the future, besides Obama’s actions. The census is coming and that may change the composition of Congress. How districts get designed may make a difference. Any movement to open primaries would force contestants to the middle rather than to the extremes in order to win primaries. And campaign finance rules would help a lot.
Nonetheless, I give Obama a great deal of credit for trying to reach out, even given the intransigence of the Republicans. I hope he continues to do that. Perhaps Rahm can be the arm twister!
If we’re talking about today’s GOP then that is clearly a bridge to nowhere…
To which the Republicans said thanks but no thanks….
That capacity works well only when honest information about what is going on in the country penetrates the Beltway bubble. One of the consequences of the security issues has been to tighten the Beltway bubble tighter.
That also drives out contrary opinions and inconvenient facts.
We will see how well he can break through the bubble during the next year; a campaign year can provide the excuse for getting him outside the bubble.
As I said during the primaries, the difference between the candidates was Edwards wanted to change the economy, Hillary wanted to improve society, and Obama wanted to recreate government.
Democrats picked Obama, perhaps not understanding that he did not intend to enact the goals of the other two candidates directly. Rather, Obama saw that the way to achieve lasting economic advancement and social change would be to develop a bi-partisan approach to American problems.
He is, of course, right, and if he had had a group of Eisenhower Republicans to work with, he would have made some progress.
Unfortunately, Obama has only Limbaugh/Palin Republicans to work with, and they are incapable of running anything — when the going gets tough, they quit and blame the Democrats.
And now on his other flank, he has the Norquist/Hamsher libertarians, who are just as incompetent in their own way — when the going gets tough, they bail too.
Clowns to the left of him and jokers to the right, he’s stuck in the middle with us.
To paraphrase, the only thing in the middle of the road are dead animals and drunk drivers.
Obama’s failure was to adapt to the new political reality of GOP obstructionism. I think to any objective observer, its clear that Obama and the dems did try ( by giving baucus the space to conduct his bipartisanshp kabuki theater in the finance committee, by leaving Gates, by trying to appoint Gregg) to work with the GOP. But the only one who suffers from that is Obama- the GOP was smart to know there’s no downside (for their party, that is- huge downside for the country) to mucking up the gears of our political institutions. This was Rovian jujitsu at its best- like portraying Kerry the war hero as a coward, they made Obama the uniter look like a divider. The intended effect of this attack is not to convince people that Obama is a divider, but to make him look weak and on the defensive. Again, this is pretty impressive political strategy and goes to show you that we sorely need a progressive version of guys like Newt, McConnel and Gregg.
The only way out of this is for Obama to control the senate caucus for the next 6 months before the 2010 elections and pass popular legislation. He needs to reign in Lieberman and Nelson or its going to cost him. Obama 2.0 needs to be less Reagan and more LBJ. Unfortunately, its not a role he’s particularly well suited for – he clearly wants to be Reagan. But as you said above, he is a quick learner. The irony is, he already has a modern day LBJ as his chief of staff- the brilliant and talented Rahm Emmanuel. If only he could turn Rahm on Lieberman, I think he may be able to square that circle.